Journal of addiction medicine · 2022
Assessing Childhood Maltreatment Exposure in Patients Without and With a Diagnosis of Substance Use Disorder.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Löfberg Andreas, Gustafsson Per A, Gauffin Emelie, Perini Irene, Heilig Markus, Capusan Andrea J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Childhood maltreatment (CM), widely held as a risk factor for substance use disorders (SUDs), is commonly assessed using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ). Retrospective self-reports are, however, potentially subject to bias. We used a unique patient sample with prospectively documented CM to examine the performance of the CTQ and how this is affected by the presence of SUD.
METHODS: Analysis was based on a total of 104 individuals. Subjects with prospectively recorded CM were identified from a specialized childhood trauma unit in Linköping, Sweden (n = 55; 31 with SUD, 61% females; 24 without SUD, 71% females). Clinical controls had SUD but no CM (n = 25, 48% females). Healthy controls had neither SUD nor CM (n = 24, 54% females). We analyzed the agreement between retrospective CTQ scores and prospectively documented CM by κ analysis and assessed the performance of the CTQ to identify CM exposure using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
RESULTS: Agreement between prospectively and retrospectively recorded CM exposure was poor for sexual abuse (36.6%, Cohen κ = 0.32, P = 0.008) and physical abuse (67.3%, κ = 0.35, P = 0.007). Overall CTQ performance was fair (ROC: area under the ROC curve = 0.78, optimal cutoff = 36.5, sensitivity = 0.65, specificity = 0.75). However, performance was excellent in the absence of SUD (area under the ROC curve = 0.93, cutoff = 32.0, sensitivity = 0.88, specificity = 0.88), but poor in participants with lifetime SUD (area under the ROC curve = 0.62, cutoff = 42.0, sensitivity = 0.60, specificity = 0.36).
CONCLUSIONS: These data support the CTQ as a tool to assess CM exposure but suggest that it may be less useful in patients with SUD.
METHODS: Analysis was based on a total of 104 individuals. Subjects with prospectively recorded CM were identified from a specialized childhood trauma unit in Linköping, Sweden (n = 55; 31 with SUD, 61% females; 24 without SUD, 71% females). Clinical controls had SUD but no CM (n = 25, 48% females). Healthy controls had neither SUD nor CM (n = 24, 54% females). We analyzed the agreement between retrospective CTQ scores and prospectively documented CM by κ analysis and assessed the performance of the CTQ to identify CM exposure using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
RESULTS: Agreement between prospectively and retrospectively recorded CM exposure was poor for sexual abuse (36.6%, Cohen κ = 0.32, P = 0.008) and physical abuse (67.3%, κ = 0.35, P = 0.007). Overall CTQ performance was fair (ROC: area under the ROC curve = 0.78, optimal cutoff = 36.5, sensitivity = 0.65, specificity = 0.75). However, performance was excellent in the absence of SUD (area under the ROC curve = 0.93, cutoff = 32.0, sensitivity = 0.88, specificity = 0.88), but poor in participants with lifetime SUD (area under the ROC curve = 0.62, cutoff = 42.0, sensitivity = 0.60, specificity = 0.36).
CONCLUSIONS: These data support the CTQ as a tool to assess CM exposure but suggest that it may be less useful in patients with SUD.